Constructive ideas for the Post Office site

The new renderings are out, the TC meeting is coming up, battle lines are drawn and subtle accusations are flying.

But, what if we all took a step back and (as author would say) tried to color outside the lines.

THis is is a once in a lifetime opportunity to do something great for Maplewood.

Maybe shoehorning the biggest building the public will allow into the space is the right thing ( I like the new renderings and think it would be a real improvement over what is there now)

Maybe preserving the post office building (maybe for public space) is best choice.

Does it have to be one or the other.

What if something different turned out to be a really great thing for the town.

What if we thought about how we could most improve the already wonderful experience of being in our village. What would add to the vibe, the charm, the useage. What could we create with that space that we don't have now that would make being in downtown Maplewood better for those who live there, work there, shop there, eat there, walk there, drive there. What could we do that would most benefit all of Maplewood.

Are there better options than those that are being promoted?

Here's my two cents.

In every town in Europe there is a central square, a piazza, that is the heart and soul of the town. I've lived in Italy and several years ago I walked (hiked ) across Spain. I walked into and out of perhaps hundreds of small Spanish towns, some with only one main street, others that were beautiful small cities. Every single one of them had a plaza or a piazza where people gathered, sat at sidewalk cafe's came with their families, their dogs, their grandmothers. It was ( as Inda Sezcher said) an outdoor living room where neighbors could gather in community and enjoy the life of the town.

We don't have that in Maplewood, but if we did wouldn't it be fabulous.

The closest thing we have is the sorry space in front of the bank building and in front of the old post office.

We have Ricalton Square which is used for Dickens Village , but other than those 8 days a year its main function is to provide a nice place to walk through from your car to pick up Chinese food or go to the movies.

What if at the old PO site a small building, with perhaps 1/2 the footprint currently planned were built. It could have retail and parking on the lower level, Perhaps retail and an arcade facing Ricalton Square. ( covered area) on the main level that would lend itself to a sidewalk café ( think a modern much smaller version of the arcade in St Marks Square . But between the building and Ricalton, and adjoining Maplewood Avenue, there would be a beautifully designed, small paved plaza, with trees, plantings, people friendly architecture and space for people to gather, sell Girl Scout Cookies, get petitions signed and meet their neighbors.

If this were a perfect world I'd also want apartments for seniors above , additional parking, a through road in the back and a fountain.

What's your idea.

@sarahzm great ideas. These ideas are considered "Placemaking" and are the core of modern urban planning.

+100

Kurt

"Modern" placemaking cracks me up. It's been going on for a few thousand years.

sarahzm said:

"Modern" placemaking cracks me up. It's been going on for a few thousand years.

I know, it seems to have been rediscovered with Jane Jacobs after the debacle of public housing projects.

Kurt

Nice concept, but proposing the developer cut the building in half is a non-starter. The town needs a fiscal return on the deal. It's already too small to make it anything of real substance.

I understand that a developer would need to make money. But perhaps weighing the potential fiscal return to the town vs the potential improvement to the quality of life of the town might be in order. The town spent millions on The Woodland. In previous years they built the Recreation center in DeHart Park, and the pool complex. Maybe this would be a case where a reduced price and a PILOT would be in order.

sarahzm said:

I understand that a developer would need to make money. But perhaps weighing the potential fiscal return to the town vs the potential improvement to the quality of life of the town might be in order. The town spent millions on The Woodland. In previous years they built the Recreation center in DeHart Park, and the pool complex. Maybe this would be a case where a reduced price and a PILOT would be in order.

This^^^

Also consider that a smaller piece of land allows smaller developers to bid on the project, opening this up to a larger pool of developers. I am not convinced a small piece of property wouldn't be developed considering a home was torn down and rebuilt on valley street.

Kurt

Bravo............all anyone from Engage or its fellow travelers have asked is either to retrofit the Post Office or cut back in size/scale any proposed new building. Oversimplification or not, it should look like it fits into the Village and not liked it was dropped on it.

Unfortunately I do agree that the current builder cries real wet tears every time he loses a dollar in revenue.........but if one could be found to design and make real this project/concept he would have
practically every one with him. Except chucky...........he hates everything.

sarahzm said:

Maybe this would be a case where a reduced price and a PILOT would be in order.

I don't understand what you are saying. The current plan (call it a beheamoth or not) is being presented with the conditions of a reduced price and PILOT already. Are you proposing additional concessions be made?

Some folks seem to make an implicit assumption that the developers of new builds are greedy, self-centered businesspeople who grope for every nickel, while developers of repurposed buildings are more philanthropic and less self-interested. It's nice in theory, but is that real?

I'm not against starting from scratch and soliciting proposals for repurposing the existing building, but I assume we'll just be in the same position a year from now - looking at renderings where the developer adds two floors, the same issues about bulk, scale, design and materials.

People have also complained about process, but the early public meetings did devote time to this type of public brainstorming - piazzas, fountains, tables, chairs, bike paths, it's all been presented and considered.

Red_Barchetta said:

sarahzm said:

Maybe this would be a case where a reduced price and a PILOT would be in order.

I don't understand what you are saying. The current plan (call it a beheamoth or not) is being presented with the conditions of a reduced price and PILOT already. Are you proposing additional concessions be made?

My suggestion was not in reference to the current plan. It was to offer a reduced price/PILOT to a builder to make in financially feasible to build a smaller building with outdoor public space.

Sarahzm:

"In every town in Europe there is a central square, a piazza, that is the heart and soul of the town. I've lived in Italy and several years ago I walked (hiked ) across Spain. I walked into and out of perhaps hundreds of small Spanish towns, some with only one main street, others that were beautiful small cities. Every single one of them had a plaza or a piazza where people gathered, sat at sidewalk cafe's came with their families, their dogs, their grandmothers. It was ( as Inda Sezcher said) an outdoor living room where neighbors could gather in community and enjoy the life of the town. "

This sounds like a great idea, but would it work here? I mean the towns you are talking about are hundreds of years old (or more) and this kind of gathering is their culture. My understanding is that the people you are referring to do not have back or front yards of their own, thus the square becomes their outdoor place. Would folks from the Hilton Neighborhood really drive over here and park just to sit outside and eat an icecream cone? Should the residents on the outskirts of town be asked to support infrastructure that mainly benefits the folks near town center? I'm open to consideration, but I fear this would become littered with debris and taken over by kids with skateboards.

sarahzm said:

Red_Barchetta said:

sarahzm said:

Maybe this would be a case where a reduced price and a PILOT would be in order.

I don't understand what you are saying. The current plan (call it a beheamoth or not) is being presented with the conditions of a reduced price and PILOT already. Are you proposing additional concessions be made?

My suggestion was not in reference to the current plan. It was to offer a reduced price/PILOT to a builder to make in financially feasible to build a smaller building with outdoor public space.

Maybe I'm not explaining myself well. The town has made offers, and their response has been the large building we are all here discussing. If you're saying the building should be reduced from what they are offering, then my point is that they will certainly ask for more concessions.

TimFryatt said:

Nice concept, but proposing the developer cut the building in half is a non-starter. The town needs a fiscal return on the deal. It's already too small to make it anything of real substance.

That's not really true. The town needs to avoid an open-ended money pit which is not the same as getting one million versus 500,000 from a developer for the project. The focus should be on doing what is right for the Village.

Red_Barchetta said:

Sarahzm:

"In every town in Europe there is a central square, a piazza, that is the heart and soul of the town. I've lived in Italy and several years ago I walked (hiked ) across Spain. I walked into and out of perhaps hundreds of small Spanish towns, some with only one main street, others that were beautiful small cities. Every single one of them had a plaza or a piazza where people gathered, sat at sidewalk cafe's came with their families, their dogs, their grandmothers. It was ( as Inda Sezcher said) an outdoor living room where neighbors could gather in community and enjoy the life of the town. "

This sounds like a great idea, but would it work here? I mean the towns you are talking about are hundreds of years old (or more) and this kind of gathering is their culture. My understanding is that the people you are referring to do not have back or front yards of their own, thus the square becomes their outdoor place. Would folks from the Hilton Neighborhood really drive over here and park just to sit outside and eat an icecream cone? Should the residents on the outskirts of town be asked to support infrastructure that mainly benefits the folks near town center? I'm open to consideration, but I fear this would become littered with debris and taken over by kids with skateboards.

I don't know if it would work, but I think it is worth considering. I think people from far flung neighborhoods come to the village to eat, get an ice cream, buy a book, get their hair done, go to the movies and more and while they are there this might give them a place to stay longer and enjoy.

Many people in Maplewood have back yards with swing sets and slides, but they still come to the public playgrounds with their kids.

I believe, that the new building gives Maplewood a chance to rethink and update Ricalton Square. Sarahzm is correct in that the space is currently used mostly as a pass through from the parking lot and train station to the stores....and, the Christmas Village. While I don't have any immediate ideas about how the space could be prefigured to encourage more 'square-like' activity, it would not surprise me if during the demolition and construction that the space will be affected and in need of a freshening up once the new building is completed.

Squares in many countries typically have a fountain or something in the center surrounded by public seating with walks radiating out to the corners and well as through the middle. Space limitations probably preclude this array, but with a modicum of creativity we should be able to improve this patch of green space in the village.

FWIW, I find the latest drawings of the proposed replacement for the PO to be a welcome improvement over the previously scaled ones and the old building.

In my experience, successful public spaces are built in the center of town and are surrounded by destinations. Ricalton square is primarily a thoroughfare to/from the parking lot and the train and is not much used as public space. A piazza next to Ricalton square would suffer from the same traffic pattern, being on the edge of the commercial district with nothing to draw people there.

How about if they built an "L" shaped building, that extended along the Village Coffee side and the train tracks . The plaza would have retail or restaurants lining two sides and would be open to Ricalton Square and Maplewood Avenue. If there were sidewalk cafes under an arcade and public seating in the plaza would that be enough of a draw.

krnl said:

I believe, that the new building gives Maplewood a chance to rethink and update Ricalton Square. Sarahzm is correct in that the space is currently used mostly as a pass through from the parking lot and train station to the stores....and, the Christmas Village. While I don't have any immediate ideas about how the space could be prefigured to encourage more 'square-like' activity, it would not surprise me if during the demolition and construction that the space will be affected and in need of a freshening up once the new building is completed.

Squares in many countries typically have a fountain or something in the center surrounded by public seating with walks radiating out to the corners and well as through the middle. Space limitations probably preclude this array, but with a modicum of creativity we should be able to improve this patch of green space in the village.

FWIW, I find the latest drawings of the proposed replacement for the PO to be a welcome improvement over the previously scaled ones and the old building.

You are all asking about more and better public space...but we are getting less:
If you look at the current site plan for the proposed building you will see that Ricalton Square is being made smaller and the trees along the Ricalton Sq edge closest to the PO site are being removed. The driveway into Ricalton lot is being shifted north. (How will the King's trucks ever maneuver?)
Why is the PO project being allowed to encroach on Ricalton Square? The Redev. Plan does not allow that.

can you provide a link to the site plan that shows this.

sarah,

I like your idea just as I liked the similar idea posted by Mr. OOTS months ago.

However I think it is too late.

What IndaSechzer says about downsizing Ricalton Square may be true, but it may be due to confusion in the town's original prospectus for a development project to replace the post office. I seem to remember noticing in that document from not long ago that it used an inaccurate depiction of R. Square, leftover from its size and layout from before the post office was built. The park area of the square was somewhat reduced, and parking expanded, in the 1950's after the library was torn down. I noticed the discrepancy at the time but didn't call it to anyone's attention.

IndaSechzer said:

krnl said:

I believe, that the new building gives Maplewood a chance to rethink and update Ricalton Square. Sarahzm is correct in that the space is currently used mostly as a pass through from the parking lot and train station to the stores....and, the Christmas Village. While I don't have any immediate ideas about how the space could be prefigured to encourage more 'square-like' activity, it would not surprise me if during the demolition and construction that the space will be affected and in need of a freshening up once the new building is completed.

Squares in many countries typically have a fountain or something in the center surrounded by public seating with walks radiating out to the corners and well as through the middle. Space limitations probably preclude this array, but with a modicum of creativity we should be able to improve this patch of green space in the village.

FWIW, I find the latest drawings of the proposed replacement for the PO to be a welcome improvement over the previously scaled ones and the old building.

You are all asking about more and better public space...but we are getting less:
If you look at the current site plan for the proposed building you will see that Ricalton Square is being made smaller and the trees along the Ricalton Sq edge closest to the PO site are being removed. The driveway into Ricalton lot is being shifted north. (How will the King's trucks ever maneuver?)
Why is the PO project being allowed to encroach on Ricalton Square? The Redev. Plan does not allow that.

Can you show the site plan and the location of the current vs new demarcations of ricalton square?

Thanks,

Kurt

I think Red is onto something. The lifestyle of the typical 21st-century suburban family does not lend itself to leisurely hanging out in the piazza. The vast majority of folks visit the village for unabashedly utilitarian reasons, i.e., to transact business. Then, it's off to work or the kids' ball game or to mow the lawn, whatever.

I also agree with kthnry that locating a piazza at the dead end of the village and on the direct path to the train is not going to be conducive to creating a vibrant public space. Seems to me we could do just as well re-imagining Ricalton rather than utilizing a large chunk of the most valuable development site in town. With the absence of the PO we picked up quite a few parking spaces, so we could probably afford to gobble up some of the parking lot real estate.

On the merits, I also happen to think the town needs additional multiple family housing near the train and commerce in the village more than it needs additional public space in the village. As demonstrated by the quick leasing of the Station House and the SO projects, there is demand for such housing, including from empty nesters currently unable to downsize within Maplewood. Additional residents in town will contribute to the economy of the village. As demonstrated by the high rents in the village, there is also demand for commercial space. I also think additional retail and services in town will create more foot traffic than some benches and chairs ever would.

And who wants all those pigeons, anyways? Such a mess!

I have a very small copy of the site plan. I have to get the larger more detailed site plan scanned. Probably after the holiday weekend. But I will definitely get it up here for you all...Or if the TC or PB are reading this, maybe they can post it more quickly as they have it...the demo clearly shows the Ricalton trees removed. the plan shows the shifting of the ingress lane.
There are other some problems with this site plan as well.

sarahzm said:

How about if they built an "L" shaped building, that extended along the Village Coffee side and the train tracks . The plaza would have retail or restaurants lining two sides and would be open to Ricalton Square and Maplewood Avenue. If there were sidewalk cafes under an arcade and public seating in the plaza would that be enough of a draw.

That's a great idea.

I too lived in Europe, and I know many small towns have their centers pedestrian with cafe and restaurant terraces. The Village is always packed when it's pedestrian. It's always a more 'vibrant public space' then. Creating a public plaza would be great. With more pedestrian days.

The current plan shows very little sidewalk space, just a massive building, next to the parking lot and Maplewood Ave. Without any plans, the re-use supporters, show us nothing.

part of the reason we don't have many outdoor public space is that they aren't usable for at least 4 months out of the year. between winter months and rainy days throughout the year, you're probably looking at 150 days that an outdoor space is not usable from a practical standpoint.

The idea of outdoor cafes, performance spaces, fountains, benches sounds really terrific, I'm not going to argue against that. But the notion that development is going to be centered around outdoor space that won't be used at least 1/3 of the time seems quixotic to me.

.

ml1 said:

part of the reason we don't have many outdoor public space is that they aren't usable for at least 4 months out of the year. between winter months and rainy days throughout the year, you're probably looking at 150 days that an outdoor space is not usable from a practical standpoint.

The idea of outdoor cafes, performance spaces, fountains, benches sounds really terrific, I'm not going to argue against that. But the notion that development is going to be centered around outdoor space that won't be used at least 1/3 of the time seems quixotic to me.

Stores and restaurants do not close when the weather's bad, only the outdoor areas are less used. During the Winter Holiday season people still go out. Public space can/should be part of the development. Maybe not centered on it, but part of it. It's working just fine in many places, and not in others. The Village Alliance can make it work. They are doing a good job with their Festivals, special nights, special events don't they? There could be synergy with the Library, and other cultural associations in town to keep the space alive.

Idealistic? I think you mean not profit oriented enough, something like that. Improving the quality of life of the residents should be part of this conversation too.

Maybe I'm not understanding what people are proposing. I interpreted it as the outdoor plaza as a hub, the center of the development.

It's hard to retrofit a successful outdoor public space. Lots of them get built and go unused. For example, the little park in downtown South Orange is great for events, but usually it's pretty empty. In my opinion, the best public space in SO is on Sloan Street -- the strip of wide sidewalk in front of the diner and the ice cream shop. There are always people hanging out there, running into friends, etc.